Meet the Press: Where's the passion, David?
With NBC's long-time lead for Meet the Press withering away as ABC's This Week with George Stephanopoulos continues to gain, it seemed like a good time to check back in with both shows to see what's going on. I am going to be writing more on this matter in coming days, but here's a fast look at the bottom line on what I saw Sunday.
As one of the first critics to say David Gregory looked like he was going to be okay as the successor to Tim Russert, I have to acknowledge being disappointed in what I saw Sunday from the new host. Simply put, there was little energy and virtually no passion. And that is the opposite of what made Russert so compelling to watch.
The flaws in Sunday's telecast were not all the fault of the host. The four-member panel assembled for a discussion that lasted some 20 minutes was one of the dullest and least engaging I can remember seeing on a Sunday-morning public affairs show since the networks started making them ratings accountable.
Only once or twice in all that time, did one panelist address another, and no one seriously challenged anything their colleagues said -- an absolutely remarkable development given they were on air about 10 minutes longer than the discussion warranted.
The worst were Byron York, of the Washington Examiner, and Michele Norris, of NPR, who spent more time looking down at their notes (or maybe it was just the table in the case of Norris) than addressing Gregory or the camera that serves as the viewers' point of view. Jeffrey Goldberg, of the Atlantic, wasn't much better. The best was Robin Wright, formerly of the Washington Post and now the Woodrow Wilson Center. The person who booked this panel needs to do a lot better if this show is going to remain in first place.
I will write more about the other two segments of the show later in the week.
But, by way of comparison, This Week was absolutely rollicking in the energy level and interaction for its panel: ABC's George Will and Jake Tapper, along with the Washington Post's Ruth Marcus, the New York Times' Paul Krugman, and former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich. And, believe me, for all the joy the panelist seemed to find in their give and take, it was also more informed and deeper intellectually than anything said on Meet the Press Sunday.
For the record, here is what's happening in the ratings battle between the two: As of April 5, for the 10th straight week, This Week narrowed the gap until there is only about a 200,000 viewer difference between the two -- 3.34 million for Meet the Press to 3.14 million for This Week.
The ABC News show has cut the gap by 480,000 viewers in the last year. That's a 12 percent gain year to year vs. a 4 percent decline for NBC's Meet the Press.
Comments
I can probably count the number of Meet The Press with Tim Russert episodes that I ever missed on one hand. When he tragically suddenly passed away, it felt like losing a member of my family. He was fair but firm with all of his guests, no matter what their party or ideology was. I kept watching when Tom Brokaw filled in, mainly because it was in the middle of election season, but it definitely wasn't the same.
Since David Gregory took over, I think I've watched maybe 3 episodes of Meet The Press. Since Gregory doesn't have the ability to conduct a hour-long pressing interview like Russert could, he instead sticks to short boring interviews and spends over half of every show talking to a panel instead. On top of that, unlike Russert or even Brokaw, he had a major reputation as a left-leaning reporter for years and is exactly what is not needed in a time where everyone in the mainstream media is afraid to question or criticize the Obama administration.
Politicians once feared going on Meet The Press and would prep for hours knowing that Tim Russert would put them in a corner. That fear is no longer there, and going on Meet The Press is now no different than doing any of the hundreds of interviews given every week by cable news anchors. Of course nobody can ever replace Tim Russert, but certainly someone could do a lot better job of filling his shoes than David Gregory.
Posted by: Wetzel | April 12, 2009 9:55 PM
Z:
Despite everyone's over praising of the late Tim Russert, I agree that Gregory is doing a very poor job as a replacement for Russert (and i predicted he would be this bad early on). I was fascinated by Glen Greenwald on Moyers 2 weeks back recalling Russert's sworn testimony that all the conversations he had w pols were "presumptively" off the record until the pol authorized disclosure-the very definition of a propagandist, not a reporter, and one that hardly squares w the hard driving Russert image.
Russert and MTP had for yrs been too much a part of the Establishment amd Village Group Think;Russert did his on air job much better than the inept questioner Gregory does now, and now others can see the MTP Emperor has no clothes IMHO.
Pining for a false beautiful pristine past is irrelevant, the American media inc the late Russert dumbed this process down to entertainment so long ago, real change in corporate media group- think will be required for the public to be better served.
Moyers had suggested Jon Stewart for the MTP job, someone outside the cynical
self referential, self absorbed, and overly compensated DC Village media crowd, but we won't be that lucky any time soon!
Posted by: Tonyjoe | April 13, 2009 3:01 PM
Z, if you're looking for a moderator who will challenge what the guests say (and I do think that this is ultimately the moderator's job), then David Gregory is the worst choice NBC could have made to host MTP. This is the same man who said this about covering the lead up to the Iraq war:
The right questions were asked. I think there's a lot of critics -- and I guess we can count Scott McClellan as one -- who thinks that if we did not debate the president, debate the policy in our role as journalists, if we did not stand up and say, "This is bogus," and "You're a liar," and "Why are you doing this?" that we didn't do our job. And I respectfully disagree. It's not our role.
But it is Mr. Gregory's role and one he has punted since he started modding MTP. He allows Repub talking points that have been debunked all week by others to go unchallenged on Sunday morning.
David Gregory is an empty suit. A hairdo. It's time to replace him with someone who will do what he cannot: ask a follow up question.
Posted by: Monty | April 13, 2009 6:13 PM
I'm really disappointed in David Gregory as host of the show. There are times when he's failed to report all the facts about a topic - for example; a governor accepting $2.4 billion in stimulus while refusing $110 million - and his interviewing focus on uninteresting facts. Another disappointment was his confrontation with the three governors pressing the development for high-speed rail could have been a very informative conversation about the hurdles in development of high-speed rail, the benefits, how politicians from differing parties find common ground, etc. Instead the interview emphasized topics that focused on divisiveness, popularity, and qualms.
I watch the Sunday news talk shows to find solutions and to move forward. The current MTP focuses on the problems.
NBC needs to consider a replacement, either for him or the producers talking in his ear, to improve the quality of information provided during the show.
Posted by: Greyson | April 14, 2009 12:51 PM
With the upheaval casued by Russert's departure, for my money, "State of the Union" with John King seems to me to be the new political show of record on Sunday mornings. King's simply a smarter political reporter than Gregory or George S. and cut his teeth in the trenches. So far the producers have tried hard to get portions of his show outside of a Washington-centric perspective. Let's hope they keep it up...
I, too, like King's commitment to getting out of Washington and trying to report a story each week. Thanks. Z
Posted by: JB | April 14, 2009 5:10 PM
ChickaBOOMer: Why "Meet The Press" Sucks
http://chickaboomer.blogspot.com/2009/04/why-meet-press-sucks.html
Posted by: StewartIII | April 14, 2009 7:40 PM
Who Needs A Sunday Morning Jolt?
http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/nbc/who_needs_a_sunday_morning_jolt_113991.asp
Posted by: StewartIII | April 14, 2009 8:04 PM
The only similarity I've found between the Russert-era "Meet The Press" and the Gregory-era shows is use of the "But first..." leadin to the show's initial guest.
Guests no longer squirm under tough, but fair questioning. Now they have to fight off the effects of drowsiness.
Posted by: Jaymann | April 15, 2009 1:25 PM
I try to watch George S. every Sunday.
However, I'm unhappy that he's saddled so much with Cokie and Sam D. He must have to have them on, just as he does G. Will. Also uhappy with the guy who was a Republican consultant. It shows.
Time for some reporters who are really out there gathering information rather than the same old tired talkers.
I have to turn it off sometimes despite my recognition of Stephanopoulos' smarts.
I agree with you on Cokie and Sam, and I do not agree that he "must" have them on. The show is better with them. Thanks. Z
Posted by: Roldo Bartimole | April 15, 2009 1:32 PM
I used to watch Tim Russert religiously.
He really got in his guests faces on issues. David is a whimp. Nice guy,
but a whimp. So I don't watch anymmore.
Posted by: debbie | April 20, 2009 7:14 PM
I DON'T WATCH MEET ANYMORE GREGORY DOES NOT ASK TOUGH
QUESTIONS LIKE TIM I WATCH WALLACE AND GEORGE S
Posted by: RICH | April 21, 2009 5:40 PM
I've been trying so hard to stick with MTP since Tim's passing, but it's just not interesting anymore. David Gregory's antagonism is misguided and totally ineffective. His digs come off as arrogant and miss the target consistently. So long, MTP...I can't take it anymore.
Posted by: Marlene the Dream | May 3, 2009 9:51 AM
M-e-e-chelle Norris is worthless as a panelist because she is a show host and is supposed to act "neutral" (although she is an obvious liberal at core, so you end up with boring comments that seldom find faulth with any Democrats). They shouldn't have anyone on who has to pretend not to have a an opinion. No more revealed frauds like Jay Carney and Linda Douglass.
Posted by: Cronium | May 6, 2009 3:09 PM
MTP has become such a disappointment that I can no longer watch. NBC make a change.
Posted by: Bob McKee | May 18, 2009 2:10 AM